Sometimes you’ll put up a good fight and lose. Sometimes you’ll hold on really hard and realize there is no choice but to let go.

Acceptance is a small, quiet room.

–

Cheryl Strayed

==

“The whole is simpler than the sum of its parts.”

–

Willard Gibbs

====================

While attaining leadership positions is often a difficult weaving and winding path strewn with obstacles, losing your leadership role is pretty easy. It is easy because, well, while the compass to actually being successful leadership has a clear center line <uniting in a common cause> the path has to be wide enough to accommodate all the lanes necessary so that the organization can fit on the path <you cannot leave some behind and you cannot just take the “we few” along for the ride>.

Alignment in business is always a difficult thing.

Shit.

Alignment in any group environment is always a difficult thing.

Alignment is a multi lane highway, not just offering a center line, which needs to be continuously paved with a deepening trust and cooperation. But, suffice it to say, nothing kills trust & cooperation faster than lack of trust in competency. In other words “not knowing your shit.” Words need to meet actions, actions need to meet decisions and decisions need to meet the greater needs & wants of the whole not just the parts.

All leaders, all of us, have made promises as we assumed responsibility. Some were hard promises and some were hopeful promises. As we shifted into leadership maturity we learned, often the hard way, how to shade the promises properly. What I mean by that is while in our minds something was a hopeful promise, in our employee’s ears it was a real promise <albeit … the savvier ones were skeptical>.

Ah,skeptical. I will suggest the ‘skepticals’ are the most important employees in an organization in terms of “mutual progress” and the ultimate success objective. Skepticals are the ‘swing employees’, i.e., the ones who held your organization together or tore it apart.

The skepticals listened to how the hopeful promises were shared. The skepticals discerned whether you … well … “knew your shit.” This is more the attitudinal part.

The skeptical also view with an eye toward another aspect. What you actually do, or did as things proceed, with your hopeful promise. This is the functional part.

While any business leader worth half a shit only offers ‘hopeful promises’ which contain at least a glimmer of possibility those words then have to shift into “what we are gonna do to attempt to make that glimmer a reality.”

Oh. Yeah. This is the plans, the what we are gonna do, that kind of pragmatic practical shit.

This is where skepticals really own your ass.

They are the careful readers of promises who sit back and ask themselves whether they want to believe such a thing badly enough to overlook its improbability. They are the ones who can actually drive the organization through improbability towards probability.

Yeah. Even more so than the delusional rabid believers. Why? Because the ‘believers’ are far too often blind to the real obstacles and wildly bludgeon their way toward some objective no matter how improbable the objective. Believers have a nasty tendency to create carnage.

It is the Skepticals who create a path which is sustainable.

Skepticals are always, well, skeptical of the ‘new thoughts’ you share with them and relentlessly compare it against not only what they know but also against whatever other information is out there <they are the ones who maddeningly demand “have you done this before and where”>. Skepticals are always, well, skeptical enough they focus on what I believe the Intelligence Community calls ‘expectability.’

Skepticals understand that when promises are made there is a significant difference between ‘it might be true’ versus ‘you can’t prove it’s not true.’ They are quite good at recognizing when you are misleading versus when you are honestly trying to get the organization somewhere … even if it does seem slightly improbable.

Look. No one can be sure of anything 100%. And an organization is never 100% aligned when a new leader steps up to assume the responsibility. Therefore you, everyone, assigns a rating to information. And an organization with a strong skeptical segment most typically turns to these skepticals, not the believers, for some guidance on how to rate the leaders words & promises. Outside of the rabid few, an organization is usually not willing to run right out of the gate with a new leader <and we who have led know that>.

You assume as you step to the front of the room that the Skepticals look at you with an uneasy sense you are simply playing your role and not really worthy of the role. They seek to get behind what they, skeptically, view as the mask of who you are and what you offer.

You learn quickly that you, and consequently the organization, are doomed out of the gate if they end up frustrated. Frustrated either that they cannot discern what is behind the mask or frustrated that what they can see looks less than what is needed to deliver upon the promises made or frustrated by what they view as “making shit up” versus “knowing your shit.”

I know everyone knows this, but a leader can get fired for any number of reasons. The ones most overlooked are:

Failure to convert skepticals <attitudinally>

Failure to convert skepticals <functionally>

Converting Skepticals is always the key to organizationally unity <sorry, no, it is not breeding excitement among the fewer believers nor is it attempting to placate the non-believers>.

I say that to make another point.

Skepticals reside in the promised land for a leader. One foot in hopeful promise and one foot in practical promise.Most good leaders recognize that there is a significant difference between war against the status quo and war against stagnancy. Status quo, most typically, has aspects of shit that keeps the trains running. In other words, not all status quo is bad and throwing out the baby with the bath water is never good.

And, therefore, you learn very very quickly as a leader you just cannot lie and that hyperbole kills you with Skepticals. You realize it is dangerous, to the organizational success and your own success, to embrace any kind of absurd unblinking willingness to look your people in the eye and flat out lie to them. You just cannot do shit like say “things are going great … just the way they planned” when to the skeptical, and possibly the organization as a whole, it sure appears like “there is a lot going wrong.”

This believability gap can very quickly shift from a simple hiccup on the path or crack in the alignment plan to a crevasse of dysfunction. Regardless. None of that suggests alignment or unity. It all undercuts competency and creates concerns with regard to capabilities, planning and implementation … all of which are the foundation on which any leader stands upon <even more so than vision and hope>.

Discrepancies force people to choose between what they hear and what they see and what they actually know in their own experience.

A leader can only create an upside down world for so long before the skepticals decide to make it right again – whether the leader wants it to be that way or not.

In the end?

Ignore the Skepticals at your own peril. Any successful leader will tell you focusing on Believers will not only put your own career in danger … but it puts the organization, as a whole, at risk.

“By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd.”

–

The Civil Servants’ Year Book, “The Organizer” January 1934

========

Ok. This is about the fallacy of the “us versus them” narrative. One of the first temptations in business differentiation is the ‘us versus them’ narrative. Not only is it a natural instinct to identify an enemy <them> to compete against it also naturally generates a competitive spirit as well as survival spirit.

It is incredibly tempting, but incredibly wrong.

Frankly, it is what lazy business leaders and strategists do.

And, in their laziness, they create what is more often than not a false narrative <how can they be the enemy if you hire some of them?>, but it also falls apart as you realize that ‘the enemy’ often has the same intentions you do and often has some aspects of business product, organization, thinking … that you actually like.

That is the failing of an ‘us versus them’ narrative.

Well. That is one failing. The ‘us versus them’ narrative is strewn with not only failings, but danger in the larger scheme of things.

Often it is rooted in some ‘conspiracy theme’ within ‘them.’ Them always seem to have a nefarious intent to rule the world, or crush our thinking, or take something away from us or … well … basically undermine all that is good & right about the world “us” sees as what is good & right <and ‘common sense’ to ‘us’>. This theme can tear your business culture apart through paranoia as well as wasted energy constantly defining ‘what is good & right’ <because those damn “thems” keep trying to show us it isn’t good & right>.

Let me suggest several things with regard to the underpinnings of ‘us versus them.’

– Common sense is relative to perspective.

Contrary to popular opinion much of common sense is not universal <therefore less than common>. My main proof point for that is easily the United Nations Human Bill of Rights. One would think there are some common sense beliefs that underline all human behavior, well, at least until you try and gather all the countries in the world and get them to agree to them.

People are no different.

Common sense advocates typically suggest what I call “headline beliefs” of which almost all of us quite easily grasp and nod our head to. It is when we get to the story outlining the hows & whats where everyone starts losing their minds. An ‘us versus them’ narrative in the hands of a charismatic leader can dwell in the headlines. Unfortunately, there is such a thing as ‘day to day behavior’ which needs laws & rules & guidelines in order to establish a relatively fair game in this thing called Life. Businesses are exactly the same.

Here is what I am saying.

In discussing a headline common sense thought 90% of people are all in lock step.

In discussing the details under the headline common sense thought 90% of people are all in slightly different places.

That, alone, is one of the key reasons most reasonable business leaders avoid an ‘us versus them’ narrative.

– Conspiracies may exist but they most typically are within the purview of the few and not the many.

What this means is that there may possibly a small group of people scheming something up, but they remain few because <mainly> the many have no palette for what that few have to offer. In addition the ‘few’ scheming rarely are powerful people.

Yup. Despite what conspiracy theorists posit about cabals of powerful people somehow guiding the globe on its axis, most powerful people who would have an inclination to involve themselves in some nefarious scheming like this would have no desire to collaborate <they are typically of dictator mentality>.

In addition to the non-collaboration aspect the majority of powerful people have less interest in running the world, they are more focused on defending their own empire <and ego>. That is exactly what happens in business.

These people may truly be ‘them’ to ‘us’, but they are not our enemy — they are simply more likely to be indifferent to ‘us.’ It is difficult to invest in an us versus them narrative when ‘them’ doesn’t even care. Most businesses avoid “us versus them” because they have enough trouble maintaining integrity within an organization to have to bring in the whole concept of “thems” manipulating anything.

– Complexity not simplicity.

I could invest page after page outlining how complexity destroys the oversimplified ‘us versus them’ narrative, but I will focus on one aspect – people can rarely be easily bucketed into simplistic character, attitude & behavior descriptions.

Not all accountants are boring or socially inept.

Not all conservatives are against abortions.

Not all liberals are socialists.

Not all religious people are close minded.

Not all French people like wine.

Not all Hawaiians know how to surf.

In business, and sports, you learn this quickly <it seems like politics hasn’t received this memo yet>.

You meet ‘them’ and, uh oh, you not only find you kind of like them, but more often than not <yikes!>, they believe some of the same things you do. The ‘us versus them” narrative can only exist in an environment where oversimplification has a chance to live. Business is anything but simple. So while a crappy, or lazy, leader may find some initial success rallying the organizational troops with an “us versus them” narrative it all falls part pretty quickly.

That is why business people avoid the ‘us versus them’ narrative.

Anyway. I read somewhere that if you truly want to defend liberty, the first thing you should do is defend the liberty of people you like the least. But instead, in today’s world, we seem to be spending more time focused on defending the liberty of “me”, and what “me believes” first. Even businesses struggle with this <under the guise of “building a strong culture”>.

Let’s be clear. Leaders — of companies, of organizations, of countries, of any rather difficult to manage and align group of people — realize that if they intend to make something happen that it just needs to be done <sometimes> acting in the best interest of ALL who they lead and do it without discussion because discussion slows the process down.

Is this a conspiracy? Nope.

This is leading. Sometimes you get it right <and good things happen and you never explain all the decision you made without inviting opinions of others> and sometimes you get it wrong <and bad things happen and you (a) keep your mouth shut and just hope the problem goes away or (b) end up explaining every decision minutiae in extraordinary excruciating public discourse>.

I am not suggesting there are not better ways to communicating and aligning an organization than simply ‘doing & telling later’, nor am I suggesting transparency isn’t important in terms of uniting, but I am suggesting that in business sometimes a leader makes a decision because it has to be made, and it is made with the best intentions for “all” and not with bad intent for “us” and a better intent for “them.”

And maybe this is where businesses have truly learned to avoid the ‘us versus them’ narrative.

If you plant the narrative and constantly water it into a healthy belief system within a business, it can then very very quickly become an unhealthy integral part of an organizational DNA viewpoint. Side to side <department to department> as well as down to up <workers – perceived doers/non intellectuals – to management – perceived non-doers/intellectuals>.

Lastly. Here is what the good business leaders have learned as to the most insidious organizational aspect in an ‘us versus them’ narrative:

… take care of their own <the ‘us’> even to the detriment of the “all”

By the way. Crappy leaders love this because it absolves them of responsibility and they can always point to external ‘them’ as the reason why ‘us’ isn’t getting what they believe they deserve.

Regardless. The narrative permits ‘their own’ to be constant victims of whatever ‘them forces’ that are constantly scheming to impede or crush the ‘us’ personal ambitions.

Part of the appeal of us versus them is it’s simplicity.

In a complex, changing world, it is tempting to reduce multifaceted issues to the us-and-them narrative.

The narrative eliminates any context thru oversimplification. Interestingly, the oversimplification actually creates conspiracies/conspiracy speculation and enhances fears by suggesting the complexity doesn’t exist <and people know in their heads there has to be more and create the ‘more’ all on their own>. This, in turn, permits everyone to skip facts and go immediately to emotion from which point “we the people” <whoever ‘we’ is> resides on one side and “the system” or “some idiot who cannot do the right thing” or “a cabal of dishonest untrustworthy thems” on the other. This narrative is particularly tempting to the weak leader these days because general mistrust of everything is at an all time high.

The charismatic crappy leader suggests that the business <the ‘us’ in the equation> has a plan, a good plan, a plan that really will not work only if the ‘thems’ work their mysterious wiles. Trust therefore resides with ‘us’ and mistrust resides with ‘them.’

The us versus them narrative is seductive. Aspects of it sound great, frankly, to any and all of us. That’s why it is so compelling if you are not careful.But the world, and business, is more complex than ‘us versus them.’ A good leader, a leader who understands you are seeking success in the moment, today, tomorrow and next month/year/decade will weigh the true costs, and effects, of investing in the us versus them narrative beyond simply winning.

Ponder. And listen closely to the charismatic jesters who lean in on “use versus them” rhetoric.

=================

“Too many people are only willing to defend rights that are personally important to them. It’s selfish ignorance, and it’s exactly why totalitarian governments are able to get away with trampling on people.

Freedom does not mean freedom just for the things I think I should be able to do.Freedom is for all of us. If people will not speak up for other people’s rights, there will come a day when they will lose their own.”

“When a fact begins to resemble whatever you feel is true, it becomes very difficult for anyone to tell the difference between facts that are true and “facts” that are not.”

—-

Katharine Viner

==============

“Alternative facts aren’t facts, they are falsehoods.”

Chuck Todd

===========

“Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?”

Groucho Marx

================

“Perception is a dynamic conflict between the attempts of an outer world to impose an actuality on us and our efforts to transform this actuality into a self-centered perspective.

Perception is a confrontation between an inward-directed vector of external reality compelling awareness and an outward-directed vector of physiological, cultural, and psychological transformation.

Where these vectors clash, where they balance each other, is what we perceive. This in sum is my view of perception.”

—–

Source: Understanding Conflict and War – Volume 1: The Dynamic Psychological Field

==========

So. I had this piece in my draft folder for months and pulled it out when I heard the term “alternative facts.” Yeah. Not ‘non-truisms’, but real actual ‘alternative facts’.

This is a bastardized version of the false branding concept of “perception is reality.’

My belief is that at some point a long long time ago Trump read the back of some book about branding <because he has never read a book> that said “perception is reality” and he was off to the races creating a hollow universe of ‘perceptions’ in which he could skate along the superficial surface toward riches & fame.

Today, Trump and his merry band of liars, are now taking the perception business to a whole new level of absurdity.

Let us be very clear on some basic Truths:

Alternative facts live only in an alternative universe.

Perception is not reality.

As someone who has dabbled in marketing professionally “perception is reality” truly galls me. It is an ugly lie.

And it is even uglier because in an untrained, inexperienced mind … or a misguided lack of moral individual … it can be used to defraud people – unintentionally or intentionally.

Perception is perception.

Reality is reality.

And perception is reality only, and ONLYif you permit it to be so.

Here is a fact.

Perceptions, by definition, are hollow things unless they are truly a reflection of reality. And how can you know if this is true? If you puncture perception, it deflates to whatever reality is. That is a ‘full honest perception.’

Let me be clear <because any real business person who has worked on any consumer brand in the world understands this>.

When you float on the superficial surface of a “perception based Life” you can only get away with it until people get interested enough to actually interact. Because interaction is when the piper gets paid. As one famous advertising person said “nothing kills a bad product faster than good advertising.”

Look. I am not suggesting perceptions, and managing them, is not a viable marketing objective nor am I suggesting that perceptions aren’t important. What I am saying, not suggesting, is that you learn very quickly in the business world that perceptions MUST align with reality or you are screwed. Reality must deliver upon perceptions offered & promised.

For example.

Trump can tell me he is intellectual, smart and knows the best words, but every time his reality, his actions, deliver hollow simplicity, idiot thin-skinned responses and odd word salad verbiage I start questioning the perceptions he is asking us to believe.

The only people I have ever seen try and exist in a ‘perception is reality’ universe have been marketing hacks <who didn’t know any better> and con men <who knew better but wanted to make money and run>.

Perception is not reality and trying to create a universe based on perceptions is a hollow world.

Unfortunately in the universe we live in the American president, from day one to, well, ad finitum, will constantly be trying to convince us reality is not reality, perceptions are what he and his merry band of liars say are truth, alternative facts exist and there is some alternative universe that he, and they, can only see.

We seem to be entering a new era in which truth is what Trump and his administration wants it to be.

Trump was a historically dishonest presidential candidate, a historical dishonest president and his merry band of surrogates <liars> have displayed a persistent commitment to lying – needless lying or necessary lying. Trump is a man who creates his own reality and lives in it … and he and his surrogates are asking us to live in it. Okay, not ‘ask’, he is demanding it.

As his inauguration speech suggested, you will believe in his reality and will live in it and therefore you will be demanded, not asked, to follow his lead within it.

You & I, America and the rest of the world will have to decide whether it will accept this alternative universe or convince him his reality is actually a hollow universe of perversely wrong perceptions.

There are a number of risks at hand.

One is basic society construct – reality is no longer fact based, but ‘feeling’ based.

The other is that Trump anchors this alternative universe based solely on some warped perceptions and therefore those who elect to follow will follow the pied piper <allegiance to him above all> and not to any ideology, values or principles <not even the US Constitution … because he becomes the sole arbiter of what the Constitution “means to say to us”>.Trump is not a normal phenomenon and his alternative universe of false perceptions and alternative facts should not be normalized by something as simplistic a “politicians have always lied” and “we can never trust the media.”

Politics has always had a tenuous relationship with truth but even in that environment there are limits.

As Jonathan Last wrote in the conservative paper The Weekly Standard … “you can obfuscate, you can misrepresent, you can shade the truth to a ridiculous degree, or play dumb and pretend not to know things you absolutely do know. But you can’t peddle affirmative, provable falsehoods.”

Here is the surprising truth to add.

Journalism has always had a good relationship with truth, but even in that environment there have been missteps which create a false narrative that journalism, as a whole, is dishonest. The majority of journalists are not dishonest, every viable publication in existence has a standard of honesty & proof and while they may tend to a more liberal skewed perspective truth is truth and facts are facts and they treat both with reverence <because their existence relies on that>.

Anyway. This ‘perception is not reality’ truth is going to be challenged like it has never been challenged before.

I will give you the easiest way to puncture a reality/perception gap. Get someone to envision the repercussion of acting, or not acting, upon the perception. What does the day after look like, feel like and … well … be like.

This helps meet the challenge created by false leaders who exaggerate crises or create them with the intent to subvert, and pervert, the constitution, the judiciary process and the system itself.

This helps meet the challenge created by false leaders who offer simple solutions for complex problems.

===

“The simpler past seems more attractive than today’s complex reality, and so people vote [thanks to] inchoate frustrations. They choose simplicity and locality over complexity; identity over internationalism. Politicians promote themselves by giving voice to this. Hence, in addition to Brexit, we have calls for Scottish independence, Catalan independence, and so forth.”

—

Tainter

====

And maybe that is where perception gains traction in a complex world. If complexity doesn’t show simple benefits, or maybe the real benefits are difficult to align in a cause & effect way, perception starts beating reality.

Well. It will until reality catches up to the false promises & false simple solutions offered by perceptions.

The alternative universe can only last as long as the alternative universe can stave off the real universe. Just as alternative facts can only last as long as the real facts can get their shit together and get in the game.

I would note that Trump’s alternative universe isn’t so much about his lying <although that is truly the shiny object we focus on> but rather he’s just wrong in a simplistically naive way about almost everything <and even on the things he has a valid point on and I could construe as ‘right’ he unnecessarily cloaks it in ambiguity & hyperbole so that even his right is wrong>. He rambles aimlessly about anything that happens to pop into his brain and is convenient for him to say at the time. He is not typically deliberate about his lying he is simply authentically living in his own alternative universe and explaining that universe to us.

The universe itself may be one bigly lie, but his explanations are truth about the universe.

Trump is a rambling, bombastic, amoral narcissist. He’s never pretended to be anything else. What you see is what you get. His integrity resides solely on authentically communicating the big Lie <although … in his mind … in his universe … it is the big Truth>.

Oddly this seems to mean, at least to a lot of everyday people, that an authentic liar has more integrity than a calculated communicator.

He is genuine in his belief of this alternative universe.

His perception is actually his reality <just ponder that scary thought for a moment>.

Ok. That is bizarre. Fucking bizarre.

Trump and his merry band of liars use a variety of truth-blurring techniques <i call it “chaff”>. Their objective appears to not only be to control by creating doubts about what is real and what isn’t, but also to create an alternative universe in which whatever he does actually looks like it makes sense.

To quote President Trump himself … Bad! Sad!

There is a much bigger lesson here for everyone beyond whether our new president is capable of telling the truth or whether he, and his followers, even care and accept alternative truths as reality … perceptions are NOT reality.

Perceptions should always be held accountable.

People should be always be held accountable for the perceptions they create and offer.

In the end I come back to the beginning.

Here is what I think as an everyday person. Envision the day after your perception is faced by the harsh truth of reality.

Will you be scared?

Will you be excited?

Will you be happy, sad, or somewhere in between?

Good on you if you come out of these questions excited, happy and looking forward to the reality which perceptions suggested it would be. Just make sure you treat what you perceive with care.

Here is what I think as a business & marketing person.

The gap between perception and reality is the “death trap.”

====

‘In the day we sweat it out on the streets of a runaway American dream …’ It’s a ‘death trap,’ a ‘suicide rap.’ I want to guard your dreams and visions. ”

Well. There is a shitlaod of advice on focus but the truth is that learning what to disregard is one of the most difficult things in the world.

To be clear. This isn’t really about ignoring shit nor is this about tuning out distractions, this is more about acknowledgement of and the inevitable ‘setting aside’ of things. In other words, deciding ‘the rest is not our business.’

Simplistically, there is a huge difference between disregard and ignore.

Disregard implies a denial of attention to somethingbecause of superior knowledge or more pressing considerations.

Ignore particularly stresses that something has been rejected without any conscious consideration while disregard can suggest a more careful, conscious evaluation that results in dismissal.

So this becomes a combination of deciding what to omit and what to not omit … what is essential and what is unessential.

This is hard as shit.

To anyone who hasn’t had to deal with this on a consistent basis in business, this whole issue gets disregarded as bullshit … ‘because common sense will tell you what is essential and what is not’.

Wrong.

And wrong again.

And let me say again … that is really really wrong.

If it were that easy, that much common sense, we would be the most efficient sonofabitches in the world.

We are not.

Speaking personally, for a curious person like me, I can quite easily find myself going down senseless rabbit holes and teasing out useless information from … well … useless information.

Everything is interesting to me, therefore, purposefully being disinterested in something seems just wrong.

Yeah. If I do this too often I become relatively useless to people. I know a lot about many things that are, frankly, not really worth knowing a lot about.

Here is what I know about recognizing something as something to be regarded and the ability to disregard the others as just ‘things’. When viewed correctly, some things show you how to interpret what is <and, I imagine, what could be>. This means that the things to disregard are the ones which will not help you in any way change ‘what is’ because, inevitably, I imagine the point of anything is to change what is. Ok. That’s just how I filter things. Ponder and choose your own filter <but have a filter>

=====

“To develop the skill of correct thinking is in the first place to learn what you have to disregard.

In order to go on, you have to know what to leave out: this is the essence of effective thinking.”

Kurt Godel

==========

Now. My last thought may create some disagreement with people. They may disagree that the point of things, in general, is to change what is <in other words, change shouldn’t apply to everything>.

Well. Here is my point.

Left alone, things will decline or deteriorate/decay in some form or fashion.

This includes thoughts and thinking. Unfortunately, even a great thought declines in value the longer it remains stagnant and static.

I would point out that the mind, itself, is exactly the same <some philosopher called this ‘the principle of entropy’>. The basic principle is that while good things happen to people within events the general arc of things tends to be negative. Therefore someone or something needs to arise to prevent the natural downward arc. But that ‘thing’ needs to be refreshed or replaced because their impact is biggest initially and loses effectiveness against the downward trend over time.

Uhm.

What that suggests is things you should disregard will vary depending on the context and the time.

What that suggests is things you should disregard will most likely not be a replication of something in the past.

What that suggests is things you should disregard are most likely not uncovered most easily by ‘common sense.’

What that suggests is things you should disregard are most likely derived through a need to separate fact from fiction and then an assessment of the value & relevance of the facts.

Nothing in what I just shared is easy.

Nothing in what I just shared suggests identifying ‘the rest is not our business’ is easy.

I do know that being successful in business management and leadership often tilts on how well you are able to identify what is ‘not our business.’

Life is not particularly kind to people who suck at not discerning what to disregard, but it rarely kills you for this suckedness.

Business is particularly unkind to people who suck at not discerning what to disregard. Not mastering, even partially, this skill will cost you promotions and, even worse, trust in independent work. Once you are deemed a shitty assessor of ‘not our business’ type of shit you will have someone looking over your shoulder for the rest of your professional career.

I end on that last thought mostly because anyone who wants to rise in a business organization knows this and they are most likely to handle that by going to the complete other side of the spectrum, i.e., make everything their business <yeah … they are the ones who claim to be perfectionists and do everything, even the unnecessary under the guise of ‘not leaving any T’s uncrossed and I’s undotted … but it is their fear of leaving the wrong things in the ‘not our business’ bucket>. They are horrible, pain in the ass’s, to work with.

Anyway. ‘The rest is not our business’ is really hard to identify.

The only thing I can suggest is ‘practice makes perfect.’ The only way to get better at it is to do it <but you will never be perfect>.

And as long as you can navigate the inevitable mistakes in judgment along the way you will do fine and will actually become fairly good at judging what to regard versus disregard.

My life has been about victories. I’ve won a lot. I win a lot. I win – when I do something, I win. And even in sports, I always won. I was always a good athlete. And I always won. In golf, I’ve won many club championships. Many, many club championships. And I have people that can play golf great, but they can’t win under pressure.

So I’ve always won.”

Donald Trump

=========

“Donald Trump cannot possibly understand [Geneva] because he has neither the experience, the expertise or the moral compass to grasp it,” Geneva is “a fundamental moral and tactical construct that serves as a foundation for the law of armed conflict, because all wars, including the global war on terror, come to an end.

We as a community of nations need to engage with one another and not be separated by horrible, immoral treatment of one side over another.”

——

Steve Kleinman

air force reserve colonel and an interrogations expert

===

Well. I almost called this “whatever serves your purpose.”It seems like every day we talk about winning and, yet, we don’t really spend a shitload of time talking about how we will go about winning.

Donald J. Trump has made me think a lot, like A LOT, about winning and how you conduct yourself in gaining wins .in light of the fact that not everyone conducts themselves the same.

Ah. Conduct.

Yeah. There are some basic human driven rules which 99% of people have imprinted on their attitudes & beliefs that affect their behavior & conduct, but, beyond that, the way you play the game can be dictated by who you are, where you live, who you are playing against and a variety of emotional <and Maslow> triggers.

Now. Today, in discussing conduct, I am not talking about what you say or being ‘political correct’ <which may be the most bastardized discussed concept in this particular point in history> but rather I am speaking of conduct as things like “well, if they chop off heads and we do not doesn’t that give them an edge … so …” … or … “if they are breaking the rules maybe we should relook at the rules <or how we play despite the rules>.”

Those kind of things.

Now. While Trump is a horrible little man ethically <amoral in fact>, he is bringing to the forefront a topic which should be discussed at a national level all the way down to the kitchen table level. This is a discussion about who we are as a country and the identity of America exceptionalism.

I say that because how you play the game matters <especially with regard to character>.

To be clear. Outcomes do matter, but inevitably you get judged or measured on both the outcome AND how you attained that outcome. With Trump blustering about ‘winning’ — maybe we have lost sight of that.

So let’s discuss the ‘how we play’ part. And, yes, this is a discussion because it is not as simple as playing by the rules versus cheating — surprisingly there is a lot of room in-between those lines.

====

“When people cheat in any arena, they diminish themselves – they threaten their own self-esteem and their relationships with others by undermining the trust they have in their ability to succeed and in their ability to be true.”

Cheryl Hughes

===

I will begin in a less than obvious place … truth & lies <and bullshit>.

Yale philosopher Harry Frankfurt outlined in “On Bullsh*t” that there is a difference between BS-ers and liars:

Liars respect the truth, because they must know what it is in order to effectively conceal it. BS-ers are different, in that “truth” is simply not a useful category to them. Any belief is “true” if it serves, if it is convenient. BS-ers have no coherent theory of evidence or of inference, have no need for such things, are contemptuous of reason. In this sense, they are much more corrupting of discourse than liars.

In other words, in order to win, the “truth”, to a bullshitter, will become whatever serves the purpose. I believe this also bleeds into “rules” <which are a version of truths>. I brought that up because I stated upfront almost everyone of us inevitably gets judged by how we got the win, not just the win and of itself. Therefore, I would suggest while outcomes/wins matter we should understand that how you play the game either diminishes you or increases you as a person.

Yes. In today’s world we actually get judged on both aspects … not just one or the other. This leads me to point out that we then get trapped in a personal tug of war — a ‘win at any cost’ attitude is the ultimate reflection of a “respect is about winning” attitude where there is such an emphasis on ‘the win’ we get pulled one way — away from always playing the game “right” and lets the ‘chips fall as they may’.

This is our wretched tug of war.

Winning is absolutely good, but the true essence of sportsmanship is something more than merely getting the most points on the board.

Getting good grades is important but not if it requires cheating.

Getting a promotion is good but not if you do so at the expense of another person.

This is hard stuff. But, if it helps, remember:

How many people do you respect that whine their way to victory?

How many people do you truly respect who has cut corners or ‘won on some technicality’?

I would suggest the notion that ‘winning is the highest value’ runs counter to most usual definitions of heroism, decency and good character. Think about:

Atticus Finch is the hero of To Kill a Mockingbird even though he loses.

Martin Luther King Jr. is a hero but his true victory, while living, was in the attempt.

Ned Stark in Game of Thrones is a hero even though he gets his head chopped off.

Even in business winning isn’t everything. Integrity matters. Integrity matters in business because every sane business leader knows you cannot win every time and your employees need to be able to seize upon ‘something’ to get up and go after the next “what’s next.”

Think about this in a comparison way, while Trump defends his any-means-necessary approach to winning & making as much money as he can <as if that is the only meaningful measure of business greatness>, I could point out many business people who are far richer than Trump who have played the game within the rules with integrity & dignity.

But while I would love to continue to point out the hollowness of The Donald this is, more importantly, about America.

I would argue that in order to have a better America, and a better world, that thinking about ‘how we play the game’ very quickly becomes a metaphorical and reality ethical exercise.

Uhm. As I typed that I made a note to google ethical game theory:

——————

An ethical game is usually not the kind of game that lets us replay a dichotomy of good and evil and, in worst case, denies us to judge between right and wrong. An ethical game design takes the player seriously as an individual with an ethical reasoning developed appropriate to their age, leaving it up to them to make a decision.

For this reason, an ethical game is also in no way a game that treats its players as »moral infants«. It presents the player with ethical challenges just as it poses motoric, exploratory, strategic or logical challenges. Purely abstract game mechanics can’t create an ethical aspect. Ethical challenges can only be generated through portraying them in the game world (and particularly through the story) – and through the medial interaction of the player with it.

Conversely, however, an ethical challenge can create game mechanics, which are never abstract, but result from the conflict in the player’s mind as a very specific challenge in the game world.

————————

Well. When I read that I immediately thought it paralleled what I believe is what we everyday schmucks do, and face, every frickin’ day. The game of life, and business, constantly adjusts to the skill of the players involved. And as reality adjusts those playing get better and better. And, yet, the constant adjusting also demands the players to improve their skills. That demands work. I say that because, uh oh, that is where “rules” truly get challenged.

Work. Yikes. Rather than put in the work to improve the skills to win … uhm … some players ‘do whatever it takes’ or use ‘whatever serves the purpose’ to win. In other words they ‘park’ ethical reasoning somewhere and focus solely on ‘the win.’

This is America in a nutshell. While Life is lived and challenges are met some players’ ethics get nurtured while other players shelve ethical growth so as not … well … not lose. It is here that I would point out this is exactly what Trump is advocating: not losing’ rather than ‘winning.’

Think about it.

Not losing, as an objective, basically makes winning a morally empty principle. The win itself is the glory … and we spend little focus on how you played the game <because the glory resides in the outcome>.

Let me be clear. This can be an attractive thought to most of us everyday schmucks.

Anyone in today’s world, in the daily & weekly grind focusing on all the challenges facing us and mentally taking each obstacle & challenge and, in addition, permitting each to take on a life of its own … could quite easily begin to think everything was going in the wrong direction … in other words … we were losing <and the wins are difficult to see>.

And that mental ‘loser’ hole gets a little deeper if you believe you have been working hard and ‘playing the game hard’ and doing all the right things the right way. And in that moment … in that hole … in that moment in which you are tired of working so hard and not seeing any clear cut victories, you start edging in to “so what will it take for me/us to finally win” <and get out of his loser hole>.

Uh oh. The slippery slope of ‘how you play the game matters’ looms in front of you.

Let me be absolutely clear on this. It is hard, even for the most principled person, to not think about stepping on this slope. Especially when you have someone like Trump shining a spotlight on your thoughts with regard to the ‘loser hole’ and offering a “let’s start winning” again message <with no rules on how to go about getting the win>.

Anyway. Here is what I think.

Trump has seized a moment and offered a ride on a fairly attractive slippery slope. For years, in our culture, America <society> has been in conflict with regard to winning.

Winning is everything versus everyone is a winner.

Conflict 1:Winners get demonized by their win at any cost attitude <and celebrated to the same time>.

Conflict 2:Participants get demonized by their inability to win <and yet celebrated by the victory in the attempt>.

You cannot, well, win.

This conflict is exacerbated by generational conflict. Conceptually the former <winning is everything> is owned by the older generations and the latter <everyone who participates in the game wins> is owned by the younger generations.

The old see their version of winning being marginalized and at exactly the same time they see overall larger country and economic results lagging <or in their eyes … “the country isgoing the way of the loser shithole”>. Therefore, to those people, anyone who dares reject the rules of their game, especially if they do not win, are double losers because they were not smart enough to “do anything it takes to win because winning is everything” we need to get out of this frickin’ loser shithole we are in.

This is where someone like Trump can look attractive to some people. It is like hiring a new coach who looks like he is someone prepared to defy conventions – this creates some exhilaration in the fan base.

“fuck yeah … it’s about time.”

It signals the arrival of a maverick outsider who is not just going to shake things up, but is prepared to destroy to create.

That sounds good.

Well. It is good as long as it is within the rules of the game and by ‘rules’ I mean the true construct of playing the game <Geneva Convention offers specific rules and, of course, there is something called the Constitution and things called ‘laws’ and every sport organization has codes, rules and penalties> as well as the integrity of playing the game.

I admit. I am a ‘play by the rules guy.’And, I admit, Trump’s attitude irks me as a business guy. Here is what I know from a business guy perspective <and I believe it is relevant to America in general>.

Give me the construct, give me the box to play within, and I can be creative enough WITHIN the box to beat anyone. I wrote this in 2015:

This may sound odd <especially to someone like Trump> but true creativity, innovation and disruption is found within the box and not out of the box. Out of the box is most often impractical, not realistic long term and ultimately pales when placed next to ethical principles.

I would also note that winning within the box is maybe the most satisfying feeling in the world.

In the end.

How you win matters. And changing the rules simply to ‘win’ loses sight of what is really important – not the win itself but the principled effort you took to gain the win.

And if that doesn’t convince you, remember, rules represent:

“a fundamental moral and tactical construct that serves as a foundation for the law of conflict, because all conflict comes to an end. <and you have to live with yourself and what you have done>“

“Even if the altered contract had been legally enforceable, it is still morally damaged. Morality and law do differ.“

—–

George Brenkert

=================

“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

———-

F. Scott Fitzgerald “The Great Gatsby”

============

Well. Sloppiness pollutes everything, but particularly so in business. Suffice it to say, nothing bothers me more than sloppiness in leadership.

Now. Sloppiness can occur in behavior and in thinking AND in morality.

Let’s call that the holy trinity of leadership.

Let’s call it your ‘contract’ to a business, society and your betterment of your employees.

Anyway. Sloppiness matters. It matters because it leaves spaces, some little and some large, in which an organization can slide into some bad behavior or ineffective behavior. And THAT matters because, as Harvard Business Review <who knows more about management than I ever will> once wrote: “The highest measure of leadership is that it creates circumstances under which great things happen without heroics. Much of the art of good management lies in designing systems and incentives in such a way that people naturally do the right things.”

Let me highlight two sloppy features:

1. Winging it.

Winging it may be the stupidest thing a business leader could ever do.

Stupidest.

In today’s business world instincts appear to have gained exponential value over preparation. And this is stupid too. Preparation is the engine to instincts.

No preparation = no good instincts.

It is a simple formula and one that should be tattooed onto any aspiring business leader. Lack of preparation seems like it creates some obvious challenges, but to the “wingers” out there all they see is how preparation stifles their “in the moment creativity of thinking.”

What bullshit.

Lack of preparation can kill you so many ways your head will spin but let me point out two:

The easy detail which lubricates the moment.

The name of someone. The key component in the production line. A specific date.

These sound like less-than-relevant extraneous details but in the moment they can lubricate the experience so you can slip into a credibility space, a caring space or a critical audience listening space which enables you to get to the larger point. Used well, and not gratuitously, details enable progress. With no details progress is often unsustainable of not completely halted.

Winging it, more often than not, sacrifices details. In other words, you walk into situations without a valuable weapon in order to do battle in that moment.

context.

All problems without context appear to have round holes, therefore, without preparation you are, more likely than not, to offer a round hole thought. I will state the obvious – the business world is not made up of only round holes.

Period.

Full stop.

Sloppy preparation more often than not means you lack the greater context from which you can actually offer the truly good & effective leadership thoughts.

I almost called this ‘rules’ but rules, to me, are more the written aspects of business and moral boundaries are more the unwritten norms of good behavior.

This is a different type of sloppy leadership.

It is sloppy because it defers all morality, ethics and soul directional leadership decisions to, uhm, what is legal. As we all know … okay, as most of us know, morality & law can differ. Not surprisingly, in business, I can do the legal thing and, yet, still be doing the wrong thing.

Sloppy leaders have a tendency to absolve themselves of providing an organization with a steady moral compass. They may on occasion make a statement, or a stand, on some aspect of what could be construed as a ‘moral weather vane’ but they will consistently fall back on “it is legal” as their organizational guide to behavior.

I would argue, and will, that this sloppy leadership only makes behavior worse over time. just as lawyers make gobs of money debating law in a court of law an organization can be quite creative with regard to “what is legal” in justifying their behavior – and most times it is creatively bad.

This isn’t a phrase we use often enough. Far too often we imply leadership is one individual guiding a ship alone at the wheel. The truth is that the most functional companies, and most functional leadership, is inextricably linked to the organization and leaders who get shit done.

While being a leader can have a quasi-isolated feel <because, inevitably, the buck stops there> the most effective leaders are anything but isolated. They are more often like a queen bee in which they are a hub of activity with everyone swirling around.

This image is significantly different than a top-down, office on high, leadership image. Just enough leadership is almost always inherent in an engaged leader who listens instead of dictates. They care more about shit than they can actually cure. All that leads me to say that we don’t need business heroes we need business leaders.

More leaders should remember this.

===========

“Unhappy is the land that has no heroes.

No.

Unhappy the land that needs heroes.”

Bertolt Brecht

==============

All of this leads to point out why I am relentless in my criticism of Donald J Trump as a president.

Trump is a sloppy leader

Oh. What a horrible horrible lesson Trump is showcasing for the up and coming generation of leaders. While the fact Trump is an amoral egoist “me – only – matters” human being, which disgusts me, it is his sloppy business leadership which embarrasses me, saddens me, concerns me and … well … just makes me mad.

If anybody embodies, winging it, inability to discern between morality & law <boundaries> and a desire to be “the hero” as a business leader … Trump is it. He stands for everything I, and Harvard Business Review, believe is wrong as a leader. I believe it is imperative for the future soul of the business world that we continue to speak out, loudly, that the way Trump depicts leadership is NOT the way effective leadership is done.

Sigh.

Anyway.

I am not naive. A lot of businesses are led by less-than-stellar leaders. I am often reminded of something a business guy, Peter Lynch, said to prospective business leaders seeking new positions: “go for a business that any idiot can run – because sooner or later, any idiot probably is going to run it.”

Trump is a leadership idiot.

But we do not all have to be leadership idiots.

And we all, certainly, do not have to be sloppy leader and sloppy thinkers.

We don’t all have to be great leaders but we can all not be sloppy leaders. Not being sloppy at least gives you a chance of being a great leader. And it insures your business isn’t sloppy.

Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it.

Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests.”

―

Gore Vidal

===

“The greatest enemy of clear language is insincerity.”

―

George Orwell

===

Well. I thought it was time to pull out my thoughts on political correctness. Let me begin with the poster child of political correctness – Merry Christmas. Well. I am not really sure when Merry Christmas got hijacked by Happy Holidays, but I wish I had been there to repulse the hijackers. Look. I am clearly sensitive to responses to Merry Christmas and am more than happy to pull my Happy Holidays greeting out of my seasonal greeting joy bag when appropriate but, in general, most people recognize that I like Christmas in spirit, not spiritually, and I am simply wishing everyone a little bit of the magic we call Christmas during this time of the year. But, frankly, political correctness has certainly made it significantly harder to authentically spread joy by almost demanding people to either spew soft joyful platitudes or defiantly stabbing people with a Merry Christmas.

That is where political correctness has taken us. To be clear … I think everyone believes the idea of political correctness has gone too far.

That said. My thoughts today are about that political correctness has beget an even more heinous idea – ‘anti-political correctness’. It has become the flag bearer for anything that anyone wants to say which can span from tactless ignorance to blind ignorance to, at its best, true common sense clarity <called “talking simply” by many people>.

The trouble we are running into is all three of those are running into one big blob of things being said. Basically anti-political correctness is becoming the go-to answer for anything people may object to. What I mean by that is you can now say the stupidest thing known to mankind, someone can point out that it is stupid <even in a tactful way>, and the answer is almost always “I am tired of political correctness standing in the way of truth.”

Basically we are now facing the backlash to an overextended political correctness from people sick of being told that they have to admit things that they don’t really believe <or think>. Individuals are realizing they are individuals and that they don’t have to play by the same rules as a large corporation or the ‘pretentious few who try and speak for the many.’ Speaking out has become independent of anything other than “I”, i.e., what is in MY mind, and feel like they will say whatever the fuck they feel like saying. In other words, many people are standing up and saying “I am society so why can’t I speak for society”<as if that was as easy as I just typed>.

Well. Let state the obvious point. Among the many cases in “the problems in the world today”, political correctness isn’t standing in the way of truth; stupidity <or irresponsible thinking & speaking> is. But, and this is a big ‘But’, overreaching political correctness does create a problem and it HAS created a problem in some people’s minds and it is now being released <and some of our leaders are taking advantage of it>.

Look. I am absolutely with many people who suggest political correctness has become a bigger problem than the problem it was intended to try and address. However … maybe … just maybe … instead of ignoring the original good intent of political correctness <encourage tact and sensitivity to others’ feelings around issues of gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, physical abilities/disabilities … among other things> maybe we go back to its original intent and just keep the ground rules a little simpler and stop its invasion into the minutiae of Life and what we say.

We need to keep the ground rules simple because this effort to not offend has spiraled into a type of verbal censorship, certainly has generated conflict and sometimes seems to infringe upon some fundamental freedoms.

We need to take a close look at this <without completely rejecting it> because what constitutes offensive or unacceptable speech has bled into the minutiae in everyday Life approaching simple everyday actions bludgeoning Life into a … well … wussified world.

We need to “fix” political correctness because we do need some harsh truths. We need some ‘edges’ in the world view. We need to discuss them, express them and debate them.

All that said that doesn’t mean that under the guise of some sense of individual sincerity <“I truly feel this way”> that good taste and respectful of what others think & feel has to be sacrificed <this is the balancing act> – everyone should show respect for your audience and any audience you are speaking about.

Words carry some responsibility beyond “what I feel.”

Yet. Political correctness has become a nomenclature for “not being able to speak what you feel” so words start getting thrown around without any thought beyond … ‘this is what I feel.’

Well. Sometimes what we feel is not what we know <knowledge is different than feeling> and what we feel may seem like truth, to us, but it is tainted by everything we do not know <therefore is nothing more than an opinion> … and, frankly, sometimes what we feel should be kept to ourselves.

Let’s be clear. We got to this point because many of us were afraid to speak something for fear it offends someone rather than for fear it may actually be stupid, ignorance or just wrong <I say this because this creates misguided thoughts in one’s head on how to correct the situation>. Therefore by overcoming our fear of offensiveness we simply roar our way into stupidity, ignorance or wrongness under the guise of simple speak or simply speaking our mind.

This also translates into the belief that all of a sudden those who decide to eschew being politically correct have decided they are smart or smarter than everyone else or , at minimum, as smart as everyone else. So smart that they can say whatever they believe and simply point to ‘I refuse to be politically correct’ when challenged over any stupidity they may be spewing.

====

Commenter: JoeAmerica • 4 hours ago

Get off my back libtard, you can’t control my speech.

====

It becomes words of stark harshness because there is no version of modesty, respect or dignity in the harsh backlash to political correctness. And why should there be any concern for those things when you are simply stating common sense? <that is the logic> And you get the added bonus of sticking it up the pretentiousness of, well, everyone who has even a tinge of respect for decorum or what someone may truly be offended by.

====

“Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred.”

Jacques Barzun

===

We now have organized hatred, anger and frustration. And these organizations <and some leaders words feeding on those organizations> use words that can shame, ridicule, and humiliate … delivered not with the intent to deliver the shame or ridicule … but to show “my point of view & thoughts should be heard!”

Now. I abhor & loathe Donald Trump, but in his own 4th grade bully rhetoric he has simply tapped into a pent up sense of relief that people can debate and talk in simple terms. Corporate speak and political language and marketing bullshit sayings and even tmotivational speak is dying.

No. It is being killed.

To be clear. All this ‘non political correctness bullshit is not just ‘simple talk’ <therefore the path to solving this issue isn’t simplicity or ‘dumbed down’> it is simply monologue stripped of political correctness.

It is addition by subtraction.

Do I like it? Of course not.

Do I understand it? Yes, I surely do.

It needs to be addressed for the good of society and what is going on in our heads.

Someone can get a grip on this without having to be plain-spoken <which implies ‘dumbing down’>, it can be managed intellectually and smartly because, frankly,the people who are most frustrated with political correctness ain’t dumb.

=====

“Democracy was supposed to champion freedom of speech, and yet the simple rules of table decorum could clamp down on the rights their forefathers had fought and died for.”

E.A. Bucchianeri

=====

Here is why they aren’t dumb.

This is what they see. They see that we are in a bad place with political correctness because if we have to constantly censor any conversation pertaining to race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or physical ability/disability, then it seems like we will simply bury the issues and perpetuate that what exists in the minds of people without taking the opportunity to confront them. This means in the effort to protect everyone’s feelings we have essentially lost, or willingly sacrificed, the edges and imposed the wretched middle on everyone.

This wretched vacuous middle hinders progress with regard to understanding different perspectives, viewpoints, feelings, and doesn’t really permit the discussion of real life experiences in the harsh light of reality but instead in muted thoughts of what should be discussed.

Anyway. Here is my real fear about this whole political correctness shitstorm.

Inclusiveness versus exclusiveness.

While the intent of political correctness was to make a more inclusive society and rhetoric it is now creating divisive rhetoric in which society is splintering.

While I could argue that it was pious arrogant intellectuals who created the overblown political correct environment we are chafing against … it is the everyday mostly white middle aged people who are now clearly anti-political correct.

=====

The angriest and most pessimistic people in America are the people we used to call Middle Americans. Middle-class and middle-aged; not rich and not poor; people who are irked when asked to press 1 for English, and who wonder how white male became an accusation rather than a description. You can measure their pessimism in polls that ask about their expectations for their lives—and for those of their children.

On both counts, whites without a college degree express the bleakest view. You can see the effects of their despair in the new statistics describing horrifying rates of suicide and substance-abuse fatality among this same group, in middle age.

The Atlantic

======

Regardless what you read about the anti-political correctness crowd <mostly embodied it seems by those who follow Trump around these days> they are not stupid, dumb nor ignorant. Some may have less education than the population median but since when has education always been a reflection of true smarts <never>.

Yes. It is a mainly white population that is making up the anti-political correctness crowd, but we shouldn’t ignore what they are saying or feeling because of their skin color. Why? Because they have a point.

They are angry & frustrated with how political correctness has infringed upon their lives.

Now … when people get angry or frustrated they say things that they regret <or more likely they just don’t get articulated in the best possible way>.

I think this is pretty much a Life truth.

A lot of today’s frustration with what seems to be overreaching political correctness is being captured in a loud voice fighting back without any debate wordsmithing training other than what you may get sitting at the bar with a group of your friends yelling at each other.

That said. I think it is the responsibility of those in leadership positions to recognize the frustration with political correctness and permit frustrations and anger to be heard and respectfully listened to … the frustrated masses deserve that.

What they do not deserve is to have their anger flame fanned and encouraged. People deserve to be heard and offered solutions not someone simply agreeing with them and offering platitudes.

I think the leaders who will end up being the most successful in this ugly stage of political correctness will be the one who leads us to the proper respectful place – where we respect the fact that not all people believe in the same things, that all people have the right to believe in different things and say different things, that simply having a different point of view doesn’t mean you are an outcast, ignorant or stupid just that you view things differently and, finally, that there is balance.

It will be within balance that we will finally encounter inclusiveness and not divisiveness.

Let’s handle this discourse with some respect & dignity. Everyone deserves that. I don’t need a leader talking down to me and, frankly, I don’t need some leader suggesting my frustrations are the source of the problems of the world or my country.

Political correctness hasn’t created shit for problems other than it makes discussing things more difficult. Simply pointing that out isn’t a leader’s job. A leader offers solutions in a respectful way. They offer solutions to a group of people no matter what point of view they have. They speak TO the people without demeaning the larger view of ‘what we should be’ as people.

<note: when originally posted September 2017 this began with “Trump is exhausting”, I am reposting because nothing has changed>

======================

“For in every adult there dwells the child that was, and in every child there lies the adult that will be.”

=

John Connolly

===========

“Refusing to grow up may be a form of rebellion. But really growing up could be a revolution.”

—

Susan Neiman

==================

Trump is exhausting. Not his presidency, not his administration, not his lack of policies or lack of any intellectual thought … just Trump.

Trump is exhausting.

I have decided he is exhausting because while I have continuously woken up every day hoping that today would be the day he would actually act like a president … okay … maybe just like a business leader … okay … I actually just want to wake up and see him act like an grownup.

Today, just another day, he wakes up and starts tweeting about London terrorism <which the UK prime minister and Scotland Yard have to respond “not very helpful”>, about an ESPN anchor, about his stupid wall, about … well … too numerous to count. And it isn’t just his lack-of-any-real-thought 140 character tweeting it is also his tween tone, teen sensitivity and teen words/grammar/punctuation.

He is not even the junior class president, he is just the gossip girl between classes.

And then, after my first response, I laughed. I laughed because I sudden realized that every teen in America must be celebrating in the halls of their high school.

Trump is one of them.

<and imagine the kitchen table conversations now taking place where parents are counseling their children only to hear “you are being so unfair !!! … I was just retweeting what was on the internet … c’mon Mom … Donald Trump does it … you are being unfair …!!!”>

Look.

Sit around a bunch of older folk and pretty soon the conversation will ease its way into how the younger generation is addicted to their phones, they cannot think for themselves, twitter is the universe of the mindless illiterate generation, twitter is the death of grammar & punctuation and they believe everything they see on the internet. Suffice it to say, older folk have a tendency to believe handheld technology is destroying young people’s minds <the implication is that ‘sensible grownups would never do the things that immature, selfish, entitled young people would do.’

<please note … I do not agree and that when I am involved in this discussion it is typically around that lat comment that my head explodes>

Anyway. Trump is what older folk actually fear & believe. Trump embodies teen twitterology. He cannot stop retweeting and cannot stop from commenting on anything and he tweets before thinking … and retweets anything that comes across his phone that looks interesting to retweet <regardless of whether he has actually checked that it is real or not> .

He can summarize his policies, with detail, in maybe 2 tweets issued as he sips his coffee in the morning.

After the coffee kicks in it will take about 6 tweets to change the previous 2.

And later in the day he gets to go on air and discuss how the world is unfair <only to him>.

This is Trump’s doom loop of consistent inconsistencies whereby the next tweet update absolves responsibility for the less than thoughtful tweets up to that point. And, of course, it would be unfair to judge him on his 25th tweet when he is already on his 1250th tweet.

Wow.

Dear Donald, have you thought about enrolling in high school again so you can troll the hallways as a bully and be the most important boy in the sophomore class? His immaturity almost makes teens look mature in contrast.

————————

Trump’s tweening behavior is tiring.

Exhausting.

I just want him to act like a grownup.

That’s it.

Yeah.

The bar is that low. Is that too much to ask?

I ask this because I know that being a grownup & “grownuphood” <a little different than adulthood> is all about becoming someone and something and unbecoming someone and something.

The truth about growing up is that we are constantly developing and un-developing and we continue to survive the missteps and step backs and figure out where & how to excel with momentary glimpses of what ‘could be’ … and that is what grownuphood is all about. And that is the ‘growing up’ I fear Donald J Trump is not doing <nor has ever done>.

If I could talk to Donald J <most likely using lots of pictures> I would tell him that grownuphood is much much better than okay. It is really good. It is much better because while some call it the burden of responsibility I call it “the freedom to enable my destiny.”

Yeah. Destiny kind of demands some grownupness <sorry about that Donald J>.

But the prize of grownuphood? You do with your destiny what you want. You can get angry if it doesn’t happen the way you want, but suffice it to say grownuphood is great because it is YOUR time to make it happen.

And I wish grownups would reclaim grownuphood and let the youth have their youth.

And I wish Trump would claim some grownuphood and let the youth have their youth.

“I still find each day too short for all the thoughts I want to think, all the walks I want to take, all the books I want to read and all the friends I want to see.”

—-

John Burroughs

==============

Well. I originally wrote this at the end of 2016 for 2017 and when rereading I said “Holy Shit!” <to myself> I want to say the same thing heading into 2018 <and now 2019!!>. So I am. I have gone back through and made some slight revisions but the thought still remains the same <2017 was almost as shitty a year as 2016>.

It seems at the end of every year I have written something about predictions for the upcoming year <some right and some wrong>. But this year it is about attitude and only about attitude for 20172018 2019.

Why? It would be incredibly easy to say 20162017 2018 sucked.

………. 2106 … and … 2017 ….and …. 2018 ……

I don’t care if you made gobs of money or got married or had some unfathomably awesome experience … you only had to look around you and see that pretty much everyone but you <and some nutjobs who still believe Trump is a smart businessman, smarter than the rest of us & authentic> had a shitty year.

Trump being elected president was only the bacteria ridden cherry on top of the melted sundae made with a scoop of your least favorite ice cream.

But back in July I said, unequivocally, I did not want to cancel 2016 <and I listed all the reasons why I would not> and just because some asshat was elected became president with the most powerful position in the world since then, a bunch of people passed away that seemed like it was too soon and there were a variety of misguided deeds and words randomly dispersed around the world, nothing has changed my mind. I did not want to cancel 2016 or even 2107 or even 2018.

And, maybe more importantly & relevant to how I view 2017 2018 2019, I do not believe because this year was shitty <and it was> that next year will be worse <although I was wrong about 2017 & 2018 which were just different versions of shitty>. Frankly, I don’t think it is healthy to fill your face book page or Instagram or even the coffee room in the office with all the negative perspective bullshit <or if you are a pseudo intellectual … be a nihilist>.

I will not unfollow anyone nor will I ‘de-friend’ anyone nor will I even stop talking with the doomsayers, in fact, I will take them on. I will not try and convert anyone to optimism but I certainly will lay out some pragmatic practical possibilities of what could be which do not suggest a shittier 20172018 2019 than 20162017 2018, but rather how each year is simply another year as a ‘work-in-progress.’

I read the news and watch far too many of the alternative universe spouting news channels.

Yes.

I live in the real world where bills can sometimes be tough to pay and friends lose jobs and die.

Yes.

I can certainly get discouraged on occasion and can get concerned about genuinely threatening things.

Yes.

I get a little nervous about the safety, security and direction of a nation I love.

Yes.

I am human and not out of touch.

No.

I do not think we are doomed or Armageddon is upon us.

In some ways I am the Sisyphus of pragmatic idealism <let some philosopher try and tease out the contradictory truth in that>. In The Myth of Sisyphus we view a man’s futile search for meaning, unity, and clarity in the face of an unintelligible world devoid of God and eternal truths or values and, yet, it is suggested we should never quit in the face of seeming futility but rather “no, it requires revolt.”

That said. I am fairly sure it is within the final chapter we view the situation of Sisyphus, the guy in Greek mythology who was condemned to repeat forever the same meaningless task of pushing a boulder up a mountain, only to see it roll down again. It is here in which far too often we ignore the conclusion:“The struggle itself … is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

============

“I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain. One always finds one’s burden again. But Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods and raises rocks. He too concludes that all is well. This universe henceforth without a master seems to him neither sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night-filled mountain, in itself, forms a world. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”

Albert Camus

=======

Many people just do not want to get out of bed in the morning. I am not one of those people <and, I admit, there are times I don’t understand the people who do not want to get up and get doing>. In my head it can be just as hard for those of us who always keep going as it is for those who find it hard to get going.

‘Hard’ is hard in my book.

Sure. There are days when I find myself trudging along stubbornly rather than bounding along battling. but no matter what I just cannot envision any alternative to doing.

“Doing” is what I do.

I kind of figure that doing is the only thing that will enable the pragmatic practical ‘better shit’ I believe needs to be done versus the ‘bad shit’ that may be done … if I am not doing my good shit.

And, you know what? I am doing it in 20162017 2018 and I envision doing it in 20172018 2019.

===============

“I’m not into convincing people I’m worthy.

I’m into people who’ll convince me on my worst days that I’m still worth the world.”

Reyna Biddy

=================

I have said before and will continue to say … I am not an optimist. I may be slightly idealist with regard to the inherent good in people and the belief that the arc of history bends toward what is right versus what is wrong … but an optimist I am not.

I am far too cynical and far too much of a pragmatist.

Oh. Yeah. That word ‘idealistic’ or ‘Idealism.’ I am always hesitant to toss that one out because far too often someone wants to add on ‘infantile’ or ‘unrealistic’ to it.

Maybe in my version of idealism there isn’t fantasy but rather pragmatic understanding that people do bad shit and people do good shit and that you either seek out those who do the good shit, and want to do the good shit, or sit back and let the bad shit-ters do the voodoo they do.

I refuse to let the bad shit-ters win.

I refuse even when faced with uncertainty or faced with some asshats who think their version of what good shit is the right shit.

That is my attitude. It was my attitude in 2016 2017. It has been my attitude for years. It will be my attitude in 2017 2018. And, I imagine, it will be my attitude until the day I die.

Here is what I <and all of us> have going for me in 20172018 2019.

The future is uncertain. It isn’t written in stone.

Yeah. Sure. The pessimistic ‘we are doomed’ people seem have a more certain view of the future – one in which it is impossible to imagine an alternative future to be optimistic about.

That seems silly to me.

I do not think it is optimistic to still find each day too short to get done what I want to get done and too short to do all the good shit I know should be done. That’s not optimism … that is simply a desire to do something and, preferably, to do good shit.

Remember. Doing is what I do.

If I were to say one thing about myself with regard to what I am good at <and I mostly think I am average at best> it would be my ability to get up every day and find some good shit to do. I don’t really care about the day itself nor do I pay much attention to whether any particular situation is good or bad — I just wake up every day thinking it is going to be too short to do all the good shit I want to do.

But. That there will be another ‘too short day’ the following day and I will wake up that day and get going all over again. That is my 20172018 2019. That is the only thing I find certain about the year.

…….. “But … I am doing something …………..”

That is neither hopeful nor is it optimistic that is pragmatic, practical and focused on contributing the arc of Life that I believe in.

Do I now what I am doing?

Hell no. But I am doing. And that is my attitude for 2017, 2018, 2019 and beyond.

There truly are few certainties in this world … but … I do believe that inevitably good trumps bad and that good shit gets done by people who do not believe bad shit is better. That is my attitude for 20172018 2019. And I tend to believe 20172018 2019 will be a shitload better than 20162017 2018 if more people had this attitude. I think we would all be able to do more good shit if we all believed each day was still too short for all the good shit we want to do.

“Happy New Year to all, including to my many enemies and those who have fought me and lost so badly they just don’t know what to do. Love!”

=====

“Sportsmanship for me is when a guy walks off the court and you really can’t tell whether he won or lost, when he carries himself with pride either way.”

–

Jim Courier

============

The Olympic motto:

“The important thing in the Games is not winning but taking part.

The essential thing is not conquering but fighting well.”

=================

Well. Trump is going to remind us all of a lot of shit we want to teach our children <by reminding us of what we don’t want them to do and be>. Yeah. How scary is that?

We shake our heads at a 70 year old man over something we wouldn’t even want our 15 year old to do.

Today? Being a bad winner <and how good leaders are never bad winners>.

So. We all know what a bad loser is, but maybe we should actually talk more about what a bad winner is. That may sound strange because … well … I mean, c’mon, who would have thought someone who wins would need a lesson on how to actually be a winner.

Uhm. And who would have thought we would have to teach someone this lesson, especially someone who would be in a position to run a large organization let alone a country.

Uhm. Could you imagine a new CEO of a company who just beat out a rival in an organization for a promotion tweeting this out to all their employees? <no … no sane person could>.

Trump has a problem <okay … several> but this tweet reflects a lack of understanding on how to be a leader, how to be a good winner and that there is a difference between competitiveness mentality and a “win at all cost” mentality.

Competitors compete, compete hard, and accept the win or the loss … warts & all. Sometimes we competitors know we got a little lucky, maybe the chips fell our way because we worked hard & practiced hard, but recognize that even then the chips could have fallen the other way.

Built into our competitiveness is a belief we should win, but that on any given day we could lose.

This type of competitiveness tends to reflect itself in being a ‘good winner’ attitudinally. A little humility. A little respect for the competition. And, unless the competitor was a total asshole, an understanding that they may have lost, but they were not losers.

Someone who has to lead an organization and wants to be successful embraces this attitude.

Now. A ‘win at all costs’ mentality is a double edged bad sword.

Not only do you compete differently <rules are more suggestions than restrictions>, but your wins are an unblemished unassailable win in your mind.

Black and white – I won, you lost.

No warts. No maybes. No ‘it was close.’ Only ‘win.’

This type of competitiveness tends to not reflect upon the competition itself and that maybe, just maybe, your competition is worthy of being your friend or respected acquaintance not as a ‘loser’ but rather ‘someone with the same intent.’ This type of competitiveness rarely reflects any version of sportsmanship.

Someone who has to lead an organization and embraces this attitude does not foster a healthy culture, does not encourage unity but rather incites cut throat aggressive competitiveness, cliques and divisiveness <and a shit load of brown nosing>.

The latter is Trump. And his New Year ’s Eve tweet tells us this. Trump reflects the worst type of lesson as a leader and as a role model.

And I don’t need Trump to make this point. Watch or read the news and you will read day after day incidents displaying the loss of sportsmanship and respect for authority and opponents.

Refs, umpires and coaches are verbally and physically assaulted.

Parents are sometimes excessive in the way they push their kids to be the best.

Coaches are demanding perfection from their players and punish them when they give anything less.

Trump?

Trump just calls people who didn’t vote for him ‘losers’.

Trump demeans media that fairly criticizes him as ‘dishonest’ or ‘failing.’

Trump demeans loyalty of followers but does not share loyalty of they cannot contribute to the win.

I imagine my main issue, beyond the fact this type of competitiveness does not encourage unity, is that I expect my President to be a role model for ‘better’ and not play to the worst of us.

And while I abhor bad winners I have a larger issue with what Mr. President Elect Trump is doing.

Children learn by example. We need to be extremely careful that kids do not get mixed messages from mentors and role models.

So what example are they getting from Trump? How to be a bad winner.

<and I am not sure he cares what lesson he is sharing with the young or if he is simply oblivious to his responsibility to be a role model>

He won. He is going to be our president <note: even of the “losers & enemies”>. He needs to start acting like a good winner and a tough respectful competitor and, well, act like a fucking leader and not a ‘loser’.

Look.

It is an honor and privilege to play a game and compete at a high level.

It is an honor and a privilege to compete for the presidency and serve as a president.

It is NOT an honor and a privilege to win – that is reserved for the competition itself. The win itself deserves respect.

That is what we all need to remember and teach our children.

Competition in and of itself is supposed to be about being the best we are capable of and respecting our own abilities as well as respecting others regardless of whether their best is better than our best.

Sports are inherently competitive <hence the reason there is a winner and a loser>. Life is inherently competitive <hence the reasons some people get promotions and some do not>.

And, let’s face it; competition brings out the best, and worst, in everyone. But I imagine my point then is that competition, and sportsmanship, inevitably is about character. And that competition, and winning or losing, makes a person’s real character come out.

Oh. I hate to break the news to everyone, competition and how you handle it takes work and training and shaping and thoughtfulness.

Sportsmanship SHOULD be simple. But it’s not. Losing hurts and winning can easily create feelings of blinding euphoria.

You can teach principles of good sportsmanship to anyone but, in the end, it’s about each person & experience.

Children watch.

They see cheating, lying, badmouthing, complaining to officials … all of which are reflections of someone’s character. More people need to take responsibility <and not blame “the game” or “the moment” or … well … anything>.

I suggest Mr. President-elect do so.

If you win, you do so with grace <because if you do even your competitors will respect you … and potentially follow you>.

If you lose, you do so with grace < because if you do even your competitors will respect you … and potentially follow you>.

Cheaters do win. Maybe not philosophically, but in the win/loss column. That is where I like to point out to people winning or losing is about character.

There are a couple of scoreboards for people who play sports.

One is the win/loss record.

One is a life scoreboard.

Sportsmanship shows up on the life scoreboard. While I wish more people would pay attention to that second scoreboard I am fairly sure with our new President, who possibly embodies the penultimate ‘bad winner’, it is going to be tougher and tougher to teach our young people what matters.

=======

believe in the truth.
I believe that every good thought I have,
All men shall have.

Kenneth Patchen

========

This new year’s tweet from Trump was horrible. Horrible not just from a personal perspective but also from a business leader perspective <no sane CEO or president of a company would ever send a tweet out like this> and also from a President’s perspective <who supposedly is seeking to unite a country … all 320 million people … not just his 60 million>.

Trump is doing everything we teach our children not to do if they win.

Which makes me ask: how can it be that a person who can’t even articulate a New Year’s wish is going to be the leader of a country I love?

He is a playing a dangerous game. And I wish he would play the game differently.

I respected Jim Courier as a tennis player and I respect his words even more … “sportsmanship for me is when a guy walks off the court and you really can’t tell whether he won or lost, when he carries himself with pride either way.”

Trump has walked off the court and refuses to carry himself with pride, or even a dose of humility let alone respect the win. And if one of his heinous surrogates comes back at me and suggests “they cannot accept the win” or “they are undermining his election” and that he isn’t creating the issue in public I have two words for you — “shut up.”

If he chooses to lead … he owns his win, he owns the narrative and he owns the topic. He has not elected to show leadership yet.

This may be the understatement of the year … he is not a gracious winner.

This New Year’s Eve Trump tweet is an embarrassment to the presidency.

I expect more, and better, from any leader let alone my President Elect.